Tuesday, July 12, 2011

Yes, I Am a Smoker

The anti-smokers are on a self-righteous crusade and therefore appear to harbor the belief that there can only be "good" or "positive" outputs that result from the extreme measures that are currently taken against the culture of smoking and smokers via years of tax payer funded anti-smoker campaigns . With the full force of the law, anti-smoking lobbyists and politicians have create a new and novel form of "legal" discrimination against an American minority that just so happens to be significantly large in proportion. How can I make such an accusation? I mean, smokers aren't being discriminated against, right? The anti-smoker crusade is only for our own good, right?

The other day I finally received a call for a job interview at a local restaurant (after passing out more than a couple hundred resumes-yes, resumes to work in a bar/restaurant) here in Los Angeles. One of the very first questions asked of me was whether or not I'm a smoker. Of course, being an honest person, I told them yes, I am a smoker of about 5 cigarettes a day (usually at the end of the day).

My interviewer promptly wrote down "smoker" on my resume as if it were some sort of prerequisite to the job. It dawned on me (soon after) that this was an inappropriate question; not only did it have absolutely NOTHING to do with the job that I was applying for, but it also occurred to me that it is none of their damn business what I do on my own time. I mean, are they asking all of their applicants what religion they practice or what they had for dinner last night? Or how about asking all of their prospective employees if they take medical marijuana (..probably in the works) or drink a few beers at night? It also dawned on me that this is the end result of years of government and anti-smoker/NGO sponsored campaigns against smoking and smokers.

The outdoor smoking ban in L.A. (a city with a fluctuating un-employment rate that officially hangs in and around 14%) was a backdoor scheme that was funneled in via Obama's stimulus plan ($$ was specifically given to L.A. for the purpose of expanding smoking/smoker restrictions). Now some restaurants/bars, already hanging on for dear life in this sh*tty economy, appear to be afraid of hiring smokers because the vice police might see one of their workers outside on a smoke brake and receive a fine (and revocation of coveted permits for various things like dancing, allowing alcohol outside, etc..) as a result. Think about that for a second.... This is total madness.

The end result of all of this stupidity is that I did not receive a call back for the job, even though I have tons of experience in the hospitality industry. Hell, I have waited on and worked functions for President Bill Clinton, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Mayor Daley in Chicago, and well, lots of important folks, and I STILL cannot find work. Now my prospects have been diminished even further. Why? Because I'm a smoker.

That's discrimination, government sponsored discrimination, plain and simple. What's really surprising is that this latest wave of anti-smoker hatred has come all the way down from the desk of our very own POTUS, a smoker himself.

To our POTUS and all of the haters that feel that they have a license to discriminate against one of the largest minorities in the U.S. of A, I say to you all: Yes, I'm a smoker and it's none of your damn business.

I had a late afternoon job interview during the dot-com business expansion days, when companies were hiring like mad and highly experienced employees, such as myself, were hard to find. I must have had a mild trace of tobacco aroma lingering from earlier in the day. The interview went fine as it was with someone older who noticed not a thing and was never an issue. But there was a very smart alecky younger person who made a huge commotion outside the interview office, marching up and down saying "Ewww" and "I smell tobacco" - insinuating I was a smoker. I never heard back either and I can only guess why, after the huge anti-smoker drama show that ensued in my presence that day. The company eventually went bankrupt, is no longer in business and I frankly couldn't care less.

When a business owner clearly discriminates against a job applicant over smoking, the law stands firmly behind him because 'it's his enterprise to run as he damn well pleases'. But try to allow smoking at this same club and it's 'you've got no right to run your business as you damn well please'. Dr. God's (C. Everett Koop) goal of eradicating smoking is gradually eradicating any semblance of common sense and decency in the process. BTW, Frank Zappa gave Koop that nickname, I love it.

I got this from Wikipedia so it's not 100% bona fide, but apparently 29 states have smoker employment protection laws. Three glaring exceptions: staunchly progressive New York, Colorado and (natch) California. The ACLU's silence on this is earsplitting.

Use some ozium, tell them you despise smokers (earn brownie points) and get the job. Any employer who asks that question first is not worthy of any fair play.

I just remembered the episode from "Everybody Loves Raymond" when Robert's mother-in-law (Georgette Engles), a secret smoker, is caught. Her sanctimonious husband is horrified, until he makes a confession of his own, and the couple decides to accept the other's "bad" habits. It was great.

The Epidemiological Evidence for Less Hazardous Cigarettes

"The justification for less hazardous or virtually safe cigarettes derives directly from epidemiologic studies. All studies that have linked cigarette smoking with various diseases have also noted that the risks increase with the number of cigarettes smoked daily, with the intensity of inhalation, with how much of a cigarette is smoked, whether the cigarette is filtered or not, and with other features that define the amount, i.e. the DOSE, of smoke inhaled" Dr. Gori-Virtually Safe Cigarettes